• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ocasio-Cortez floats 70 percent tax on the super wealthy to fund Green New Deal

Status
Not open for further replies.
Obscurity said:
My tax dollars funded plenty of research your wife benefited from. Sad to say you are living in fantasy land, tucking tail and running, because I've got you.

You don't get to benefit from my tax dollars and then tell me I don't get equal treatment.

I'm sorry, but your argument is a fraud, just like your stance here. The problem is, you already know it.

SQUIRM!
Click to expand...

General research for ALL Americans individual healthcare is a personal responsibility
 
Obscurity said:
Useless drivel. Single payer is cheaper for everyone. Why do conservatives insist on tearing the majority down to the lowest common denominator, and setting up papal supremacy for the elite, rich cucks that bloat the coffers of dick nosed legends like Paul Ryan?

Pathetic.
Click to expand...

Sure it is, prove it?? How old are you? Personal responsibility to you is a foreign concept stunning ignorance
 
Conservative said:
General research for ALL Americans individual healthcare is a personal responsibility
Click to expand...

I don't give a good god damn what you call it. I paid taxes for the research that gave your wife a fighting chance. If it were the other way around you'd prefer those tax dollars not go to research or anything of the sort.

Selfish, disgusting drivel.

You've been exposed.
 
Conservative said:
Sure it is, prove it?? How old are you? Personal responsibility to you is a foreign concept stunning ignorance
Click to expand...

I take responsibility for my own actions, like paying my taxes on time so people like your wife have a fighting chance.

And it kills you, doesn't it?

Here's the thing. I don't want everyone torn down to the lowest common denominator. I want everyone elevated. You only want to benefit for yourself.

You have been exposed. Sickening, selfish, childish.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Today’s cancer breakthroughs are the result of decades of federal investment in cancer research. Sustaining the investment in the National Cancer Institute (NCI) is essential to transform research discoveries into new
treatments and improve care for millions of people with cancer.

https://www.asco.org/advocacy-policy/policies-positions-guidance/federally-funded-cancer-research
Click to expand...

And the OP you are replying to would prefer only his wife have benefitted from it.

So much for his personal responsibility. He ought to have decided to go his own path, forgo all benefits others paid for, and have his wife try using rosemary twigs to treat her cancer.

Pathetic.
 
Obscurity said:
I don't give a good god damn what you call it. I paid taxes for the research that gave your wife a fighting chance. If it were the other way around you'd prefer those tax dollars not go to research or anything of the sort.

Selfish, disgusting drivel.

You've been exposed.
Click to expand...

You are a cafeteria liberal picking and choosing what you want to fund and then ignoring your own personal responsibilities. this thread is about the 70% proposed tax on the top 1% which as has been shown won't generate anything but a drop in the bucket but it makes you feel good, doesn't it, to get someone else's money
 
Obscurity said:
I take responsibility for my own actions, like paying my taxes on time so people like your wife have a fighting chance.

And it kills you, doesn't it?

Here's the thing. I don't want everyone torn down to the lowest common denominator. I want everyone elevated. You only want to benefit for yourself.

You have been exposed. Sickening, selfish, childish.
Click to expand...

LOL, love the rant now back to the thread topic. You don't bother me at all and in fact I feel sorry for you, such class envy, jealousy along with a belief that the federal taxpayers should fund your state and local responsibilities including your own
 
Conservative said:
You are a cafeteria liberal picking and choosing what you want to fund and then ignoring your own personal responsibilities. this thread is about the 70% proposed tax on the top 1% which as has been shown won't generate anything but a drop in the bucket but it makes you feel good, doesn't it, to get someone else's money
Click to expand...

I sure hope it made you and your wife feel good that the US Tax payers funded so much medical research into cancer. I sincerely hope that she did not suffer, and, despite our differing political opinions, that that research earned her even a moment more, would be beneficial.

The issue with you is you know I am right. As a tax payer, I pay into systems that benefit all of us, not just a select few. I'm a lunch line liberal? Spare me the labelism and identity politics. Maybe to you I don't fit the right wing checklist of odious, other hating beliefs that must be fully embraced to wear the conservative plackart, but that's irrelevant.

70% does not go far enough. We've seen the roaring 20's. We've seen what a middle classless america looks like. Right now we are a nation with two few owning too much. Conservatives in general stick their head in the sand and assume the world is black and white - it's not.

Now. I appreciate your attempt to deflect me from my tireless assault on your faulty position, but you have yet to posit a real argument that promotes your ideology. You yourself were the benefit of the US Tax payer's good graces. Why are you advocating against that? COuld it be greed?
 
Obscurity said:
I sure hope it made you and your wife feel good that the US Tax payers funded so much medical research into cancer. I sincerely hope that she did not suffer, and, despite our differing political opinions, that that research earned her even a moment more, would be beneficial.

The issue with you is you know I am right. As a tax payer, I pay into systems that benefit all of us, not just a select few. I'm a lunch line liberal? Spare me the labelism and identity politics. Maybe to you I don't fit the right wing checklist of odious, other hating beliefs that must be fully embraced to wear the conservative plackart, but that's irrelevant.

70% does not go far enough. We've seen the roaring 20's. We've seen what a middle classless america looks like. Right now we are a nation with two few owning too much. Conservatives in general stick their head in the sand and assume the world is black and white - it's not.

Now. I appreciate your attempt to deflect me from my tireless assault on your faulty position, but you have yet to posit a real argument that promotes your ideology. You yourself were the benefit of the US Tax payer's good graces. Why are you advocating against that? COuld it be greed?
Click to expand...

My so called faulty position has nothing to do with this thread topic and is off topic completely. You and I will never agree and I will put my resume up against yours any data as well as my actions. So sorry you rely heavily on the federal taxpayers for your personal responsibility issues but raising the tax rate to 70% for the top 1% isn't going to make one ounce of difference and will be nothing more than a rounding error. I will be waiting for you to prove that Medicare is less costly and more effective than private insurance along with what the country is going to get for an additional 70 billion dollars?

I suggest you learn what is included in the U.S. budget and the line items there, what taxes fund them and the purpose of those agencies. Further I suggest you stop with the greed, class envy, class warfare rhetoric being promoted by the radical left because they are making a fool out of you and you doing a good enough job of doing that yourself
 
Conservative said:
LOL, love the rant now back to the thread topic. You don't bother me at all and in fact I feel sorry for you, such class envy, jealousy along with a belief that the federal taxpayers should fund your state and local responsibilities including your own
Click to expand...

The federal taxpayers funded your wife's cancer research, funds the roads you drive safely on, the air you breath that is clean, the water you drink that is safe. The US federal tax payers, and local tax payers, funded and subsidized the car you drive, the products you buy and the stores you buy them on.

Even this machine you're typing on has some federal tax subsidy attached.

You are literally fighting against everything that has benefitted you.

You confuse me, mortal.
 
Conservative said:
My so called faulty position has nothing to do with this thread topic and is off topic completely. You and I will never agree and I will put my resume up against yours any data as well as my actions. So sorry you rely heavily on the federal taxpayers for your personal responsibility issues but raising the tax rate to 70% for the top 1% isn't going to make one ounce of difference and will be nothing more than a rounding error. I will be waiting for you to prove that Medicare is less costly and more effective than private insurance along with what the country is going to get for an additional 70 billion dollars?

I suggest you learn what is included in the U.S. budget and the line items there, what taxes fund them and the purpose of those agencies. Further I suggest you stop with the greed, class envy, class warfare rhetoric being promoted by the radical left because they are making a fool out of you and you doing a good enough job of doing that yourself
Click to expand...

The only one making a fool of thsemselves here is you. I envy no man. I simply see that the masses, the majority, are more important than the billionaire Pope class that you promote is. I have no stomach for oligarchs and the scheming ****s they buy to promote pro-corporatist agendas, like the entire republican party platform.

You're reverting to the thread topic because I found the chink in your armor and brutally exposed you.

Sorry, not sorry.

Care to answer me why it's OK your wife benefitted from our good graces, the tax payers, but everyone else should **** off?
 
Manc Skipper said:
So why are you defending the 1%?
Click to expand...


I'm not.


I'm simply asking how much more you're willing to pay if you're asking others to do so.


If I had to take a wild, wild guess, I'd assume you don't want to pay any more than you already do.
 
Obscurity said:
The federal taxpayers funded your wife's cancer research, funds the roads you drive safely on, the air you breath that is clean, the water you drink that is safe. The US federal tax payers, and local tax payers, funded and subsidized the car you drive, the products you buy and the stores you buy them on.

Even this machine you're typing on has some federal tax subsidy attached.

You are literally fighting against everything that has benefitted you.

You confuse me, mortal.
Click to expand...

And we pay taxes to fund those areas, excise taxes fund the roads, federal and state excise taxes, Each state has an EPA department and that is the role of the states with some federal over site, private sector funds drug research but then again you totally lack the understanding as to the role of the federal govt, the line items in the budget, the taxes you pay or their purpose. You are a typical liberal
 
Samhain said:
No idea where you are calculating your numbers, but you ignored the previous post where I showed that the WaPo estimated a 70% top marginal rate on incomes above 10 million( Per Cortez's definition of "tippy top" ) would statically generated 72 billion / year while affecting 0.05% of all households.
Click to expand...
I asked for the link and you didn't provide it.

Moreover, $70 billion isn't chicken feed and if it only effects 0.05% of households, that's a good thing.
 
Conservative said:
And we pay taxes to fund those areas, excise taxes fund the roads, federal and state excise taxes, Each state has an EPA department and that is the role of the states with some federal over site, private sector funds drug research but then again you totally lack the understanding as to the role of the federal govt, the line items in the budget, the taxes you pay or their purpose. You are a typical liberal
Click to expand...

Define "Typical Liberal."

Advise me why your wife was entitled to benefit from my taxes, but someone else is not.

Stop dodging.
 
MTAtech said:
I asked for the link and you didn't provide it.

Moreover, $70 billion isn't chicken feed and if it only effects 0.05% of households, that's a good thing.
Click to expand...

70 billion dollars makes you feel good but what purpose would it serve, debt service is over 560 billion a year. why do you have a problem with people keeping more of what they earn, do they bury that money in a hole in the backyard or spend it in the states generating more revenue for the states?
 
Conservative said:
So what that amounts to is about 1 trillion dollars in AGI and after applying what the rich already pay of that income raising the rates to 70% even if you get all of their income is a drop in the bucket but it makes you feel good to take someone else's money. that speaks volumes about you. 100 billion dollars less what they already are paying is how many days operating expenses of the federal govt?
Click to expand...
Yes, the super-rich can afford to pay $100 billion more in taxes, without it hurting them one bit. End of story.

I’ve done some math that indicates that, considering the hole this country is in, if you are in the top 0.1%, who own as much as the bottom 90%, and are complaining about a tax increase, then you are by definition a greedy bastard.
 
MTAtech said:
No, I'm not confusing anything.

According to IRS data for 2015, the top 0.1% of taxpayers had 10.19% of the total AGI of $10.14 trillion. That's over a trillion dollars in income. My suggestion was that if one raised the taxes of this group only, that would raise over $100 billion dollars that can be used to do some important things. Right-wingers scoff at a mere $100 billion but I remind them that they were willing to privatize Medicare, a measure that would do much harm, to save $42 billion.

Even if a single-payer system cost $3 trillion a year, the United States already pays $3.2 trillion in health insurance, not including what the government shells out. Thus, there is plenty of money available. What do I care if I pay more taxes to the government and then I don't have to pay insurance companies?
Click to expand...

We’re finally starting to get to the root of this. Progressives need to be honest and transpararent about what it takes to sustain the multi-trillion dollar programs they advocate for and “tax the rich!” is not an honest answer. These programs require an enormous tax burden for everyone. And there are plenty of reasons why people care. Number one being that the cost comparison is not a wash. The $3.2 trillion figure is largely a sum of out of pocket costs paid by the individuals who received the service. Spreading those costs out to be shared by everyone in single payer would make that system far more expensive than the current environment for many people.
 
Obscurity said:
I'd like to hear her justification for what is moral, where it comes from and from whence are we endowed with it.
Click to expand...

And why should you believe what she says?
From the link in #371:

". . . What might be most problematic about Ocasio-Cortez’s defense, though, is the idea that people should care less about specific facts and more about being “morally right" — as if this is a zero-sum game in which the two can be weighed against one another. She’s practically saying, “Well, maybe I was wrong, but at least my cause is just.”
But this is the slipperiest of slopes — the kind of attitude you can use to justify pretty much anything to yourself. And it also just so happens to be the underlying ethos of the entire Trump presidency. . . ."
 
Jack Hays said:
And why should you believe what she says?
From the link in #371:
calls Trump a racist in ’60 Minutes’ inte​

". . . What might be most problematic about Ocasio-Cortez’s defense, though, is the idea that people should care less about specific facts and more about being “morally right" — as if this is a zero-sum game in which the two can be weighed against one another. She’s practically saying, “Well, maybe I was wrong, but at least my cause is just.”
But this is the slipperiest of slopes — the kind of attitude you can use to justify pretty much anything to yourself. And it also just so happens to be the underlying ethos of the entire Trump presidency. . . ."
Click to expand...

No one said I'd believe what she says. I'd like to hear it, because I have a special interest in people's views of morality, and where it comes from. It's a fascinating point for me, and I want to hear it from anyone and everyone - AOC included, right alongside Trump, Pence, and anyone else that would discuss the point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom